Are we so Societally Evolved as to render the Constitiution (2nd Amend.) Antiquated...

[hunarcy]

You people on the Alt Right are losing any cred you had.

Watch for the end of your movement when Mueller reports to the people.

When Congressman William Jefferson was caught taking bribes, did that end the Democratic Party? When Duke Cunningham was convicted did it end the Republicans? Union bosses keep getting caught stealing and racketeering but Unions aren’t discredited. So even if your fondest fantasy comes true, and Trump himself is marched out of the White House in cuffs, do you think that will end the conservative ideology?

When Nancy Pelosi is exposed as an anti union business owner, she got re-elected. When she exempted American Samoa from the minimum wage increase, was she the death of the liberal ideology?

Billy Graham is dead, does that mean evangelical Christians are extinct?

Formula 1 raced on after Ayrton Senna died in an accident on the track.

In my lifetime, the Republican Party has been declared dead many times. When Nixon resigned, it was dead. When Bill Clinton won, the Republicans were dead as a party. When Newt lost the House and resigned, it was dead.

Hollywood continues even after dozens, or even hundreds of men behave badly. The actions of one, or even a few, do not discredit an ideal, and never have. The ideal must be defeated, not just the current figurehead. Women got the vote because the idea that they were too irrational to be trusted with the vote was discredited. Segregation was defeated not by destroying some ignorant Sheriff, nor by exposing a fool of a Governor. It was discredited as a valid and rational argument.

Vietnam wasn’t lost because of a picture of a burned little girl, nor of a VC officer being executed. It was lost because the illusion of American Military might was destroyed. The lies were exposed. It wasn’t Nixon, or Ford, or LBJ.

WHAT HAPPENED TO THE FIRST CONSERVATIVE PARTY, THE FEDERALISTS? THE NEXT ONE WOULD BE THE WHIGS.

The names changed, the ideals really did not. Describe the difference between the Federalists and the Republicans.

Federalists favored high tariffs, Republicans supported free trade. Federalists supported Britain, Republicans favored France. Federalists favored loose interpretations of the Constitution and thought there were implied powers to the Constitution, Republicans favored stricter interpretations and felt that only "necessary and proper" actions could be taken unless expressly mentioned in the Constitution. Federalists thought people should be ruled by the people, Republicans believed in rule by the common person.

Several big differences.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Windparadox triumps over hunarch. So hunarchy loves Jefferson's democratic-republic party.

 

[SavannahMann]

You people on the Alt Right are losing any cred you had.

Watch for the end of your movement when Mueller reports to the people.

When Congressman William Jefferson was caught taking bribes, did that end the Democratic Party? When Duke Cunningham was convicted did it end the Republicans? Union bosses keep getting caught stealing and racketeering but Unions aren’t discredited. So even if your fondest fantasy comes true, and Trump himself is marched out of the White House in cuffs, do you think that will end the conservative ideology?

When Nancy Pelosi is exposed as an anti union business owner, she got re-elected. When she exempted American Samoa from the minimum wage increase, was she the death of the liberal ideology?

Billy Graham is dead, does that mean evangelical Christians are extinct?

Formula 1 raced on after Ayrton Senna died in an accident on the track.

In my lifetime, the Republican Party has been declared dead many times. When Nixon resigned, it was dead. When Bill Clinton won, the Republicans were dead as a party. When Newt lost the House and resigned, it was dead.

Hollywood continues even after dozens, or even hundreds of men behave badly. The actions of one, or even a few, do not discredit an ideal, and never have. The ideal must be defeated, not just the current figurehead. Women got the vote because the idea that they were too irrational to be trusted with the vote was discredited. Segregation was defeated not by destroying some ignorant Sheriff, nor by exposing a fool of a Governor. It was discredited as a valid and rational argument.

Vietnam wasn’t lost because of a picture of a burned little girl, nor of a VC officer being executed. It was lost because the illusion of American Military might was destroyed. The lies were exposed. It wasn’t Nixon, or Ford, or LBJ.

You clearly do not understand American politics. Nixon went down. If there is Russian collusion or money laundering or other such malfeasances, President Twitler will go down. You simply do not understand America.

Nixon went down. Ford was beaten by Carter. This lasted exactly one term. Then Reagan won and passed the baton to Bush. It took four years to forget Watergate. As far as the people were concerned Watergate was old news that involved someone else.

W. was an ass. He spied on Americans and lied. The people went with Obama. Then they put the Republicans in control of Congress. Then they elected the most unelectable candidate ever. The one who destroyed the blue wall.

One of us doesn’t understand Americans. Or is fuzzy on history.

 

[JakeStarkey]

That's you, SM.

You simply don't get it.

 

[SavannahMann]

That's you, SM.

You simply don't get it.

No. I get your point. It is just that you are wrong. You are acting like if one piece of info comes out it will change everyone’s mind forever. Nope.

But back to the actual topic. What makes you think the people will rise up and attack their neighbors for being disloyal?

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Why do so many here think that the SCOTUS is the 'end and be all' authority on Constitutionality when that same body reverses its self from time to time over the years. Do people not know that those 9 justices can be removed if they mess up 'exhibit bad behavior'. They are mere mortals and capable of bias, self serving interests, petty prejudice etc. and all the other crap that the rest of us 'mere mortals' deal with. Let's not glorify what they say or what "constitutional experts" (like Obama) opine on. The Constitution doesn't really need experts anyway, it wasn't designed to be read or interpreted by experts. We had just rid ourselves from the convoluted intricacies of the Parliamentary system with a big F U the the King of England. A couple centuries later & we now need "experts" to re-write --- O, I mean interpret this document for us.

It’s not a matter of ‘think’ or ‘opinion’ – it is a settled and accepted fact of Constitutional law, beyond dispute, that the doctrine of judicial review and Article VI of the Constitution authorize the Supreme Court to determine what the Constitution means and to invalidate laws repugnant to the Constitution.

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.

See also Cooper v. Aaron (1958).

It was the original intent and understanding of the Founding Generation that the Constitution exists solely in the context of its case law.

 

[JakeStarkey]

That's you, SM.

You simply don't get it.

No. I get your point. It is just that you are wrong. You are acting like if one piece of info comes out it will change everyone’s mind forever. Nope. But back to the actual topic. What makes you think the people will rise up and attack their neighbors for being disloyal?

You are caught in a binary loop that has you like a hamster hurling along in the wheel. Run, my little hamster, run. Your neighbors will not permit the militias to rise up; they will put them down with a forever vengeance.

 

[bripat9643]

Why do so many here think that the SCOTUS is the 'end and be all' authority on Constitutionality when that same body reverses its self from time to time over the years. Do people not know that those 9 justices can be removed if they mess up 'exhibit bad behavior'. They are mere mortals and capable of bias, self serving interests, petty prejudice etc. and all the other crap that the rest of us 'mere mortals' deal with. Let's not glorify what they say or what "constitutional experts" (like Obama) opine on. The Constitution doesn't really need experts anyway, it wasn't designed to be read or interpreted by experts. We had just rid ourselves from the convoluted intricacies of the Parliamentary system with a big F U the the King of England. A couple centuries later & we now need "experts" to re-write --- O, I mean interpret this document for us.

It’s not a matter of ‘think’ or ‘opinion’ – it is a settled and accepted fact of Constitutional law, beyond dispute, that the doctrine of judicial review and Article VI of the Constitution authorize the Supreme Court to determine what the Constitution means and to invalidate laws repugnant to the Constitution.

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.

See also Cooper v. Aaron (1958).

It was the original intent and understanding of the Founding Generation that the Constitution exists solely in the context of its case law.

You also believe that Anthropogenic Global Warming is "settled science," so we can evluate the above claim by considering the source.

 

[KeiserC]

Went to a local VT gun show today and unlike past years, the place was crawling with News Stations, reporters and camera crews... not just local but some from Canada... What a Sheite show it was... Of course the cameras were set up at the various vendor tables selling the evil black guns... Some of the questions I overheard them asking... why aren't you doing background checks (they were)... Why do hunters in VT use 30 round 'clips' to shoot the deer with? (they don't.. 5rd by law)... Are you selling these 'assault weapons' to defy the people supporting the victims of mass shootings? (are you kidding!!!) Any way, that's what's going on in the tiny state / backwoods of VT...

I just finished watching the local 7:00 news and, of course, the conversations I overheard were parsed & edited to lead viewers to believe that these VT vendors / show attendees were 'obtuse red-necks with little regard for the sanctity of life'

 

[JakeStarkey]

KeiserC, the news was not parsed. The viewers say just what the vendors and shoppers are in real life.

 

[Geaux4it]

A hi-cap. magazine ban has been an issue for decades and it underscores the essential point of contention between the camps of the 'gun rights' & 'anti's'... Does it boil down to the fundamental point of the 2nd Amendment... a check, by 'the people', against tyranny?

Are we so evolved as a Society & Nation that this notion of a check against tyranny... is 'foolish' and a silly relic...? We do (currently) see dozens and dozens of Countries around the world where there is rampant oppression by dictatorships, quasi governments, political parties, royal families... over the freedoms and "inalienable rights" of their people... So are we 'above all that', now well into our 3rd century as a Nation?

House Democrats Push Ban on 'High Capacity' Magazines and 205 Different Firearms

Magazine capacity is perhaps the clearest tangible measure of where our Nation stands on this... After all, what use is an "assault rifle" if it can only be used with 'tiny' capacity mags... Is having an armed citizenry... 'armed commensurately' with that of the 'civilian' authority policing them, a bygone notion? Do our remaining 90's something elder's notions of the Wiemar Republic, no longer apply here...?

No

-Geaux

 

[KeiserC]

KeiserC, the news was not parsed. The viewers say just what the vendors and shoppers are in real life.

I disagree with your disagreement... It was a small show ( x 2 rooms) I spent time talking to ea. and every vendor there and was listening to the vendors speak to the news crews. The only vendor really televised was the guy who organized the show (white hair and balding). He made some very compelling arguments which were completely left out... I call that parsing / editing out... I was there so I'm going to claim authority on this one... the attendees that made it to news hr. weren't representative of the typical attendees there... trust me on that.

 

[JakeStarkey]

KeiserC, the news was not parsed. The viewers say just what the vendors and shoppers are in real life.

I disagree with your disagreement... It was a small show ( x 2 rooms) I spent time talking to ea. and every vendor there and was listening to the vendors speak to the news crews. The only vendor really televised was the guy who organized the show (white hair and balding). He made some very compelling arguments which were completely left out... I call that parsing / editing out... I was there so I'm going to claim authority on this one... the attendees that made it to news hr. weren't representative of the typical attendees there... trust me on that.

So then, comrade, they were reflections of you, and your cognitive mirror was distorted. I trust you on that.

 

[iceberg]

A hi-cap. magazine ban has been an issue for decades and it underscores the essential point of contention between the camps of the 'gun rights' & 'anti's'... Does it boil down to the fundamental point of the 2nd Amendment... a check, by 'the people', against tyranny?

Are we so evolved as a Society & Nation that this notion of a check against tyranny... is 'foolish' and a silly relic...? We do (currently) see dozens and dozens of Countries around the world where there is rampant oppression by dictatorships, quasi governments, political parties, royal families... over the freedoms and "inalienable rights" of their people... So are we 'above all that', now well into our 3rd century as a Nation?

House Democrats Push Ban on 'High Capacity' Magazines and 205 Different Firearms

Magazine capacity is perhaps the clearest tangible measure of where our Nation stands on this... After all, what use is an "assault rifle" if it can only be used with 'tiny' capacity mags... Is having an armed citizenry... 'armed commensurately' with that of the 'civilian' authority policing them, a bygone notion? Do our remaining 90's something elder's notions of the Wiemar Republic, no longer apply here...?

now whats funny is that the Parkland shooter only had 10 round mags.

hmmm...

 

[JakeStarkey]

Yup, Comrade Iceberg, you find that hysterically funny.

 

[KeiserC]

KeiserC, the news was not parsed. The viewers say just what the vendors and shoppers are in real life.

I disagree with your disagreement... It was a small show ( x 2 rooms) I spent time talking to ea. and every vendor there and was listening to the vendors speak to the news crews. The only vendor really televised was the guy who organized the show (white hair and balding). He made some very compelling arguments which were completely left out... I call that parsing / editing out... I was there so I'm going to claim authority on this one... the attendees that made it to news hr. weren't representative of the typical attendees there... trust me on that.

So then, comrade, they were reflections of you, and your cognitive mirror was distorted. I trust you on that.

I 'aint' your "Comrade"...!!! That's A FACT.

 

[KeiserC]

A hi-cap. magazine ban has been an issue for decades and it underscores the essential point of contention between the camps of the 'gun rights' & 'anti's'... Does it boil down to the fundamental point of the 2nd Amendment... a check, by 'the people', against tyranny?

Are we so evolved as a Society & Nation that this notion of a check against tyranny... is 'foolish' and a silly relic...? We do (currently) see dozens and dozens of Countries around the world where there is rampant oppression by dictatorships, quasi governments, political parties, royal families... over the freedoms and "inalienable rights" of their people... So are we 'above all that', now well into our 3rd century as a Nation?

House Democrats Push Ban on 'High Capacity' Magazines and 205 Different Firearms

Magazine capacity is perhaps the clearest tangible measure of where our Nation stands on this... After all, what use is an "assault rifle" if it can only be used with 'tiny' capacity mags... Is having an armed citizenry... 'armed commensurately' with that of the 'civilian' authority policing them, a bygone notion? Do our remaining 90's something elder's notions of the Wiemar Republic, no longer apply here...?

now whats funny is that the Parkland shooter only had 10 round mags.

hmmm...

You sick F_ _ _ !!! .. It's not "funny" that a 'semi-proficient' individual can just about seamlessly do repetitive 'mag' changes just above the rate of... < frequency / large cap. mag changes... You mentally & ideologically... deplorable (progressive)!

OK, so a hi-cap ban isn't going to change much for those quasi - proficient with their firearm.. (despite what Demented Feinstein thinks...) 'I' will resist a 'hi-cap.' ban on the fundamental premise that there must be a 'commensurate' "balance" of arms (capability / capacity) between the citizenry & the 'civilian authority' tasked with policing the citizenry...



Above video has been shared by other USMB members elsewhere... objectively inform yourself ( even though it runs counter to every fiber of your 'Bloomberg inspired' DNA)

 

[JakeStarkey]

You were just like those komeraden at the gun show.

 

[Marion Morrison]

The days of 'the people' using rifles to fight their own army ended over a hundred years ago. In the age of the musket the people could own, generally, equal arms to what any government could own except maybe warships. That relative equity between forces of the people and the government ended around the time the Gatling Gun came into existence. The advent of modern artillery and then aircraft in the early 20th century forever ended any parity that may have been attainable by 'the people'.

If the American people have to fight their own army it would last a week and we'd lose on all counts. Even millions of kitted and fully auto AK47's or AR15's are going to be nothing more than a nuisance for our modern army. And since the whole argument for the 2nd amendment is so 'the people' can keep themselves free by arms is more than a century obsolete it now is nothing more than the Queen of England. No real power and it is more just a quaint old tradition that people feel all fuzzy about.

And don't get me wrong, I don't like that we can no longer defend ourselves from tyranny here. But reality is what it is. And all you nibs who think you're going to be a 'hero' and 'save the nation' go back to bed. The myth you live and breath is meaningless in physical reality. When a company of M1 Abrams supported by attack helicopters and jets come rolling down the road to your town and you have a line of 100,000 guys with full auto machine guns guess who loses. So don't post any stupid 'well these people did this 50 years ago'. We aren't talking about some other bullshit, we're talking about American people fighting their own army, marines, navy, and air force.

Should people still have rifles for hunting and pistols for self protection, yes. But this nonsense about 'pertectin freedom' is mental archeology. That myth ended a hundred years ago.

Maybe you're too young to have heard about the "Viet Cong".

 

[Marion Morrison]

Yes: Raise the age for gun purchase at many retail establishments , Heighten background checks, Limit ammunition...

^And there it is folks. And they wonder why people are stocking up on extra ammo? Personally, Obama did exactly that, and no .22 ammo could be found. Needless to say, many are well-stocked with it now. Me, I got a gun that shoots the next-cheapest bullets and stocked up on that, and continue to do so, on a schedule, largely because of people like I just quoted.

Limit ammunition, how 'bout limit your food? Limit your cars?